|
Issue |
Extreme events |
Wetland ecosystem services |
Social dimension |
Social dimension |
Community-based water and wetland
management |
Soil quality management |
Participative evaluation of project
findings |
| |
|
Activity |
Assessment of institutional barriers for managing droughts
|
Identification of indicators for monitoring
environmental flows |
Community-based research on social aspects of water
management |
Community-based research-validation |
Community-based research-Gaming sessions |
Participative design of monitoring system |
Participative evaluation of project
findings |
|
Method applied |
Nominal group technique |
Cognitive mapping and group model building |
Public communication meetings and focus
groups |
Strategic choice approach |
Role-playing game (companion modeling) |
Cognitive mapping |
Cognitive mapping and group model building |
|
Objective |
Priority setting for policies dealing with extreme
events, knowledge exchange among participants; knowledge
elicitation
Integration of knowledge of specialists from different
management levels and identification of feasible measures to address complex
issue of droughts |
Assessment of environmental flow requirements of deltaic
ecosystems; Identification and selection of
ecological and social indicators for monitoring of wetland
vulnerability |
Capturing different viewpoints on water management and
livelihood strategies from among the local water users and managers in a
communityCapturing diversity based on the nature
of livelihoods; landholding status; types of crops produced; location of the
lakes or farms along the irrigation canals; gender status of the households;
migration status, and ethnicity |
Validation of findings of community-based research about
social aspects of water managementAiding decisions
to be made in particular planning and development
situationsProviding an interactive forum between
people with different backgrounds and skills |
Building of a shared understanding of factors that shape
vulnerability and responses options to low water events
Improving understanding of
behaviors of resource users and management rules
Testing the use of role-playing games in the Uzbek context
Making participants aware of impacts of their
actions on the system |
Identification of indicators for community –based
monitoring of soil salinity and wetland ecosystems
Enhancement of the usability of local knowledge to support
environmental monitoring for adaptive management |
Feedback on research findings
Discussing joint understanding of the current regime
Integration of the knowledge of specialists from different
management levels and identification of feasible measures for selected
issues
Elicitation of stakeholders’ knowledge on status quo
and potential measures |
Organization of
activity (Method/ Activity at each step and
number of people involved) |
1. Identifying water shortage problems and potential
solutions (individually)
2. “Round robin”-presentation of results of
1. (collectively)
3. Clarification questions from other participants
(collectively)
4. Voting on most important
issues (individually)
Final
discussion (collectively) |
1. Cognitive mapping (individually)
2. Group-model
building (collectively)
3. Assessment of feasible changes and
measures (collectively)
4. Presentation of models
(collectively)
Final
discussion (collectively) |
1. Public communi-cation
meetings (collectively)
2. Focus
groups (collectively)
3. Dialogue with
co-researchers (individually)
Validation
workshops (see next
column) (collectively) |
1. Choosing focus areas for problem solving
(collectively)
2. Developing options for what can be done realistically,
particularly in view of uncertainties
(collectively)
3. Identifying actions for solving the problems
(collectively)
Identifying
actors that can deliver
(collectively) |
1. Explaining objectives and rules of the
game (collectively)
2. Roles distribution (collectively)
3. Test round
(individually/collectively)
4. Operational debriefing
(collectively)
5. Game
execution (individually/collectively)
6. Discussion and
debriefing (collectively)
Debriefing
of moderators (individually) |
1. Semi-structured interviews with local community
members (individually)
2. Group session with local
community (collectively)Semi-structured interviews with
scientists
(experts) (individually)
Group
discussion with
scientists (collectively) |
1. Cognitive mapping (individually)
2. Group-model
building (collectively)
3. Assessment of feasible changes and
measures (collectively)
4. Presentation of models
(collectively)
Final
discussion (collectively) |